Replies

I've been a lurker for a while, but this finally motivated me to post. I don't mind when someone who knows nothing of a topic chooses to engage in a discussion about that given topic - that is one way that we learn. However, when frauds pretend to know what they're talking about, it grows very tiresome.

“First, it's taught as ‘scientific fact.’”

Oh really? I just graduated with a degree in biology and this was never taught as “scientific fact”. It was taught as theory – an evolving theory (no pun intended). It was also taught as theory when I was in high school, where we learned about the competing views of the origins of life, which included evolution, creationism, and views held by others, such as Lamarck.

“mutations… never create higher, more complex information – even in the rare cases of beneficial mutations, such as bacterial resistance to antibiotics.”

Then how does he define “higher”?

“cells are now known to be far too complex to have originated by some chance concurrence of chemicals, as Darwin hypothesized and is still being claimed.”

Who makes that claim?

“But we don't see transitionals between them. If these creatures ever existed, why did none survive? It is too easy to explain it away by saying they all became extinct.”

So is “too easy to explain” another way of saying, “makes too much sense to argue against?”

“Why aren't these creatures evolving into each other today? Why aren't invertebrates evolving into fish today? Why aren't fish growing little legs and so forth?”

Evolution is believed to take several generations, depending on how drastic the change. My question is, “how would we notice such a drastic change, of one species ‘evolving into’ another?” Minor changes take place over a long time, as is currently theorized. Major changes take place over a longer period of time.

“And while there are billions of fossils of both invertebrates and fish, fossils linking them are missing.”

What percentage of organisms from a particular species that were alive are actually found in the fossil record? Would it be reasonable to expect that the so-called “transitional” creatures did not have such a large population, and thus they are less likely to be found, if ever?

“Dr. Michael Denton, the Australian molecular biologist, examined these creatures on a molecular level and found no evidence whatsoever for the fish-amphibian-reptile-mammal sequence.”

Try phylogenic trees.

For this guy to pretend to intelligently discuss this issue reminds me of Hollywood stars pretending to intelligently discuss politics, the New England Journal of Medicine pretending to intelligently discuss gun control, and non-Muslims pretending to intelligently discuss Islam. There is nothing wrong with attempting to discuss an issue that is well outside one’s area of expertise. However, to pretend to have an understanding of an issue that one is woefully ignorant of necessarily lowers the level of intelligent discourse.

Creation/God...REFORMATION(Judeo-Christianity)---secular-govt.-humanism/SCIENCE---CIVILIZATION!

Originally the word liberal meant social conservatives(no govt religion--none) who advocated growth and progress---mostly technological(knowledge being absolute/unchanging)based on law--reality... UNDER GOD---the nature of GOD/man/govt. does not change. These were the Classical liberals...founding fathers-PRINCIPLES---stable/SANE scientific reality/society---industrial progress...moral/social character-values(private/personal) GROWTH(limited NON-intrusive PC Govt/religion---schools)!

Evolution...Atheism-dehumanism---TYRANNY(pc/liberal/govt-religion/rhetoric)...

Then came the SPLIT SCHIZOPHRENIA/ZOMBIE/BRAVE-NWO1984 LIBERAL NEO-Soviet Darwin/ACLU America---the post-modern left wing lunatic outer fringe age of evolution!

Oh really? I just graduated with a degree in biology and this was never taught as “scientific fact”. It was taught as theory – an evolving theory (no pun intended). It was also taught as theory when I was in high school, where we learned about the competing views of the origins of life, which included evolution, creationism, and views held by others, such as Lamarck.

Oh, Really?
Then why are we treated to such historonics by Evolutionist every time a new school board votes to grant the same privliges to other students which you enjoyed?